tool_get_largest_earthquakes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior but only says 'abrufen' (retrieve). It does not clarify what 'largest' means (e.g., by magnitude), any limitations, or how the years parameter affects results. This leaves significant ambiguity.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no redundant content. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite a full output schema and parameter documentation, the description lacks essential context about the meaning of 'largest' and how it relates to sibling earthquake tools. It is too brief to guide an agent in selecting this tool among the seven alternatives.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both limit and years, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the parameters are already well-documented in the input schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool retrieves the largest earthquakes of recent years, which is a specific action and resource. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'significant' or 'recent,' but the name and wording imply magnitude-based selection.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings such as tool_get_recent_earthquakes or tool_get_significant_earthquakes. There are no alternative recommendations, exclusions, or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.